its just a suggestion by a politician. that happen when a blogger spread a politician scandal news in his blog few month ago.
but its only a suggestion, not even USA could control over the internet users, it is deemed impossible to control the news spread in the internet.

the registration of blogger are just a stupid idea....
the internet are just too wide to be regulated... if the goverment can get the cooperation from all the blog hosting around the world then it may see the possibility...

but what the heck... if you really want to blog on some nasty thing.. be smart lar.... use fake identity lar... who ask you to be a hero lar...

well if they cannot control everyone... sure they like to potong someone leher and make them as an example....

This is actually one of the many times that Malaysia bloggers and forummers (this forum included) were asked to remove specific posting (complaint post) about specific company.

I asked my friend, who specializing in Malaysia Cyberlaw about it. Here's what he told me: "You cannot write bad stuff, or complain about bad things about other company without any specific proof. Else it would only be deemed as defamatory".

as most of us know, the freedom of speech in this country is kinda strictly limited. talking bad about someone else without proof is a big NO NO especially when it is related to politician or company. even newspaper or radio/tv also cannot do so or else they will get their business suspended.
gomen will always protect the rich.
well, if you wrote robot is a dumbass in ur blog, what can I do other than
I got no money to sue u though

hmm... i don't know what to say about freedom of speech in Malaysia... I think there is none.

Anyway, if we are always speak good and polite. Inform someone in a good manner that they might done wrong. There is no need of such freedom of speech thingy.

People hate to listen to bad words about them even thou they really doing it.

And when they have 'power' (money or anything)... they will wash-out all those who are spreading bad words about 'em.

They have done this by make all prepaid phone users to register... But then, how could they stop blogger?... I don't know if they can put such firewall to any bad keyboarders when they type something on the net... hahahah

"You cannot write bad stuff, or complain about bad things about other company without any specific proof. Else it would only be deemed as defamatory"

So far as I understand it, and as these are civil suits, the burden of proof is for the claimant to show that the person who wrote the blog (defendant) is committing the offence.

That means that the court must be persuaded that the information within the blog post is untrue. This is on a burden of proof basis which means you will lose if the court thinks it is more likely to be false than to be true. This also means that you will win if the court thinks it is more likely to be true than false - you do not need absolute proof.

Assuming that you were convinced enough to write the blog post, and so long as new evidence does not arise (of which only early drafts or witnesses to early drafts showing independant developmement of the article are likely to be relevant) then the case is likely to be decided in the favour of the blogger.

In the case of the allegations of plagiarism, the expert opinions on this case (as already widely published), whether the alledged plagiarism is self-evident to the court, and whether proof that the article was not plagiarised can be mustered by the NSTP can be expected to decide the case.

Originally Posted by iamfreelancer

well... thats malaysia.... u just can't run your mouth wide and dish out anything bad at all if you ain't got no money and ain't got no right connections...

It is always best to dish out the bad news when you have no money. If you have nothing then nothing can be taken from you. The court must take into account the financial position (needs and resources) of both parties.

Also remember that inability to pay set damages is dealt with through bankruptcy, during which process it is not possible to remove those assets which are required either for living or for working as that would deprive you of the means to live and make a lawful living.

I'm not a lawyer, but that is my understanding of the issues involved.

ad1, I believe it is very important that people cannot say bad things about others in public if they are untrue. This is not a limit upon your freedom, but just common sense. The important thing is that the courts always ensure that the freedom to tell the truth is always protected, whoever it might offend.

It is always best to dish out the bad news when you have no money. If you have nothing then nothing can be taken from you. The court must take into account the financial position (needs and resources) of both parties.

gee... isn't it the person whom losing at the court case shall bare all cost of the court preceeding and paid all the fine imposed by the opposition side? If cannot paid up for the case.... other than bankruptcy, will the losing party subject to other punishment like JAIL?????